Freedom of Information Act Office

IC Directors' Meeting Highlights

May 7, 2003

To:

IC Directors

From:

Director, Executive Secretariat

Subject:

IC Directors Meeting Highlights—April 17, 2003

Decision Item

NIH Executive Committee Proposal

Following the Funding Advisory Review Board (FARB) presentation at the
December 12, 2002, IC Directors meeting, Dr. Zerhouni requested options
for NIH governance models that would encourage shared, transparent governance
and a crisper, more fluid strategic direction to NIH corporate functions
such as facilities and IT. At today's meeting, Dr. Katz introduced two
options for shared governance that were developed after consultation with
FARB members and Dr. Zerhouni. He noted that he had also presented these
models to a sample of IC Directors and to the NIH Agenda Setting Committee.

Clarifying that "governance" refers to NIH-wide strategic direction
and oversight while "management" refers to the NIH and IC execution
of actions in support of respective missions, Dr. Katz stressed that the
governance options would support the formulation and oversight of NIH
corporate matters but not the execution of such matters. After stressing
that the models are driven by the NIH scientific mission and priorities
that are to be defined by all IC Directors, Dr. Katz summarized the options.

Under Option 1, the NIH Director and the IC Directors would continue
to formulate NIH-wide scientific direction and priorities; an Executive
Committee comprising primarily IC Directors (9 to 11 members) on a rotating
basis would follow the corporate scientific direction in its governance
purview of NIH corporate functions; and Governance Committees would
be established for each major corporate function.

Under Option 2, as in the first option, the NIH Director and the IC
Directors would continue to formulate NIH-wide scientific direction
and priorities, and an Executive Committee comprising primarily IC Directors
(9 to 11 members) on a rotating basis would follow the corporate scientific
direction in its governance purview of NIH corporate functions; however;
under Option 2, OD Deputy and Associate Directors and the NIH Chief
Information Officer rather than Governance Committees would work directly
with the Executive Committee.

After a lengthy discussion of whether a change in the current structure
is desirable as well as the pros and cons of the options presented, Dr.
Zerhouni concluded that the decision must be based on what is right for
science and for the NIH's scientific mission. He summarized the consensus
as recognizing that any change must preserve the integrity of the separate
missions and appropriations of the individual ICs, but as supporting cohesive
and shared governance where data shows that corporate-wide functions would
benefit.

In order to ensure thorough input on the issue, Dr. Zerhouni and Dr.
Katz agreed that rather than asking for a vote at the meeting, Dr. Katz
would poll and solicit comments from all ICs on the shared governance
concept and the specific options and then move forward as appropriate
and with celerity.

Because of time constraints, discussion items on the agenda were postponed
to future meetings.